White House Official 2 (2:21)

Lebanon is not part of the ceasefire. That has been relayed to all parties, parties involved in the cease fire. This will continue to be discussed, I am sure, between the President and Prime Minister Netanyahu, the United States and Israel and all of the parties involved. But at this point in time, they're not included in the ceasefire deal.

Kelly O'Donnell (2:38)

However, it seems the administration is clearly concerned about those strikes in Lebanon. According to a senior administration official during a phone call yesterday President Trump personally asked Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to to scale back Israel strikes on Lebanon to help ensure the success of the upcoming negotiations with Iran. And the president telling our colleague Peter Nicholas in a phone call this morning that Israel will be scaling back its attacks and saying, quote, I spoke with Netanyahu and he's going to low key it. I just think we sort of have to be a little more low key, the words of the president. Prime Minister Netanyahu now says Israel is seeking direct negotiations with Lebanon as soon as possible. President Trump also telling NBC News he remains very optimistic that a deal with Iran is in reach and that Iran is agreeing to all the things they have said to agree to remember they've been conquered and they have no military. That's the impression, the assessment of President Trump. Now, despite those claims from President Trump, Iran continues to exert its authority over the Strait of Hormuz. The White House says Iran has agreed to reopen the vital waterway. But after Israel strikes, Iran says it remains closed and marine traffic right now remains at a virtual standstill. That is also, according to analysts at S and P, only five vessels were able to pass through the strait today. Normally that number is well above 100. Today's Iran state media read a new statement they say is from the supreme Leader in which he says Iran will enter a new phase in the management of the strait and that Iran is praying for a decisive victory, whether it be through negotiations or on the battlefield. Now, of course, it's important to note that we have not actually seen or heard from the new Supreme Leader himself since the war began, when he was reportedly injured in that first major salvo of strikes. So joining me now is NBC News White House correspondent Garrett Hake. Our chief international correspondent Keir Simmons is in Saudi Arabia and also NBC News business and data correspondent Brian Shung. All of you here to help us understand all of this, Garrett, let me start with you. What do you make of the fact that the president is saying that Netanyahu needs to scale back and that he has sent that message?

Garrett Hake (4:58)

Yeah, I think it tells us a lot about where Iran's red lines are in this negotiation. The idea, as the vice president suggested, that Lebanon was left out of the initial cease fire was in contrast with everything that the Iranians were saying. And to your point about what we know about ship traffic, the strait wasn't opening up. The Iranians felt like Lebanon needed to be part of the deal. And I think that may be why we saw the president reach out to Netanyahu and say Something has to be done on this point to get what the US Thinks it's getting out of a cease fire deal. And so I think, you know, should probably be looked at as a positive development for any number of reasons. But it suggests that the President is willing to throw his political weight around here to get to an agreement that ultimately is acceptable to both sides.

Kelly O'Donnell (5:42)

Do we have a sense of how the President is assessing the degree of traffic moving through the Strait of Hormuz? He said it has to be opened, and yet the data says it is still a constrained space. Do we get any sense that the President has a level of tolerance for where it stands right now?

Garrett Hake (6:02)

Well, he's posted about this a couple of times saying that the strait has to be open. You know, that that's his expectation. Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary, took a couple of questions on this point yesterday that, you know, in the White House's view, free transit of the strait means free transit that a toll or some kind of metered system by the Iranians would not be acceptable. But I haven't detected any significant amount of haste around this or of impatience from the White House yet. I think there's an understanding, you heard some of this from J.D. vance, that even the communication of the details of this cease fire might take some time within Iran and it might take some time for things to settle down after some 40 days of war. So I don't, I don't get the sense that anyone is particularly panicked about, you know, the lack of movement thus far before these talks now scheduled for Saturday, start in earnest.

Kelly O'Donnell (6:53)

You get the sense the president is not quite so patient when it comes to his relationship with Naito. He has been so critical, critical publicly. And he also had an opportunity to meet with the secretary General and to convey his thoughts on that. What do we know about how that meeting went? What are the signs of how frank and candid it really was?

Garrett Hake (7:13)

Yeah. To use the Washington euphemism for a very challenging meeting. I think that's appropriate, Kelly, because we've not seen these two men appear on camera, which is very unusual for two men who do have, by all accounts, a very good personal relationship. And we've heard from Mark Ruta in a couple of interviews here domestically in which he's mostly dodged questions about what exactly the President told him about his patience level with NATO and what steps he might take to either punish it or bring it up to speed. I mean, you mentioned a lack of patience with NATO. I would say, given the vociferousness with which the president complained about NATO going back to his first term. In some ways he has been patient in the sense that he like he's been banging on NATO for, you know, going on 10 years now and the US is still a member. But I think we're probably going to, you know, see more from Ruta and more from the president about specific steps to bring the alliance along in these conversations about what happens next in Iran or else we're going to see a lot more frustration and perhaps some action from the president because it's pretty clear he wasn't satisfied with what he heard from Ruta the other day.

Kelly O'Donnell (8:16)

I take your point on it being a long term punching bag for sure. Let me turn now to care. Let us, let's talk about Israel and Lebanon and where do you think things stand right now with movement toward negotiations that could bring some of the hostility, some of the tension and the unpredictable nature of things perhaps calming that down?

Keir Simmons (8:39)

Well, I think the Israeli government, let's put it this way, is highly skeptical of the potential for negotiations to achieve what it wants to achieve. It has been targeting Hezbollah through this war and then it launched that massive onslaught on Beirut in the past 28 to 24 to 48 hours and that the Israeli government says was targeting Hezbollah. It's killed, you know, according to the Lebanese health ministry, 300 plus people. And for Lebanese it has been an incredibly traumatic period right at the end of all of this, right when the cease fire was being announced. And the Israelis say there is no ceasefire in Lebanon, even though they are prepared to talk. So I think Prime Minister Netanyahu is doing what he feels he needs to to keep the Trump administration on board and probably no more than that because the Israelis clearly continue to assess a threat from Hezbollah that they want to confront.

Kelly O'Donnell (9:43)

Course you are coming to us from Saudi Arabia and you get a sense that some of the partner nations in that part of the world are looking at the, the situation with fragile cease fire in one place, still hostilities between Israel and Lebanon in another, and how that impacts all of them. What is your take today?

Keir Simmons (10:05)

Yeah, I will tell you it's been quiet here today. We saw a fighter jet we couldn't quite identify overhead of some hours ago. But this is a place where we are now in Saudi Arabia that has been bombarded. Bahrain is just across the water behind me again, has been bombarded through the war. But there have been pretty much no attacks through this recent hours that Kuwait says that there was something that there's clearly a scaling down of the attacks by Iran. And you have to say that that is an, I think, a good indicator that they are serious about these talks, but they are also serious about gaining from the talks. And the statement that we heard from Iran's new supreme leader, that I think indicates just how hardline Iran is going to be as it gets into these talks. Things like expecting sanctions to be lifted, still wanting control of the Straits of Hormuz. These are going to be very difficult days.

Kelly O'Donnell (11:10)

The Strait, of course, is a key lever for Iran. And there was some discussion from the foreign minister there about planting mines in the Strait. Are you getting a sense that there has been any movement on that? That, of course, is a very volatile step for them to take. If that has, in fact, happened.

Keir Simmons (11:29)

Yeah, if it has happened. The difficulty is, and this is part of why the Straits of Hormuz, where 20% of the world's oil passes normally, that is part of why it's turned out to be such a potent weapon for Iran, because effectively all the Iranians need to do is to say that there's a threat and that then becomes a threat that shipping companies are going to be worried about. And we haven't seen a huge uptick in the number of ships passing through the strait because they are very cautious in terms of insurance, in terms of their people on these ships. They are large, lumbering pieces of metal, easily targeted. So certainly I think that that question of minds, the question of the remaining missile capability, drone capability that the Iranians possess, they will be seeing that in Tehran as their leverage. And they're going to be going into these talks with that kind of weapon, if you like, still pointing at this region. And there is deep, deep unhappiness in this region about the way that the Gulf countries have been targeted. Much of political, geopolitical approach has been thrown up in the air by all of this. And that's something that's going to take time to resolve, no matter what the outcome of the talks are.

Kelly O'Donnell (12:44)

And you gave us sort of that reality check about how the business world also has a vote in this. So that takes me now to Brian and markets again closing in the green today. And as we're trying to understand how Wall street is responding to this, what do you think caused green to be so prominent today given the events that are actually unfolding?

Brian Shung (13:03)

Yeah, well, look, I think that this fragile cease fire does still remain fragile, but markets actually opened the day in the red and it seemed like the bounce back that you see on that screen ahead of you, which took place around the later part of the morning really had to do with some of the commentary that we've been hearing out of the Middle east that Israel was opening up conversations with Lebanon. And for that reason, it does seem like markets are more optimistic that the trend, at least as of the last few headlines over the past let's say 24 hours, does point to this cease fire holding than it does to the opposite. Now, I should point out that we're not out of the woods yet. And in fact, I've seen notes from investors in my inbox today that said, I would not say that we are making any notable changes in our portfolio that coming from one portfolio manager that actually has to decide where in this market do they place money. So the overall story today isn't really different than it was prior to the announcement of this cease fire, which is that the volatility in these markets, Kelly, those big up days, big down days remains the story because no one can predict how this ends. Until there is a more permanent resolution to all of this, it seems like that rocky road will remain the theme on Wall Street.

Kelly O'Donnell (14:09)

And another key factor we've all been watching, oil prices today, they jumped compared to yesterday. Oil markets appearing overly optimistic yesterday about the cease fire, perhaps. What is your sense of what oil is telling us about conditions?

Brian Shung (14:24)

Yeah, and crude oil barrels settling at around $98 does suggest that there's a bit of a change in the oil market thinking on this cease fire when you consider that it was a little closer to 92, $93 yesterday. But we do still need to point out that those crude oil prices were really flirting with $120 in the lead up to the cease fire. So it's still down dramatically. But again, another point of comparison that I should point people to is that we're still well above where we were pre war when crude oil barrels were trading somewhere between 60 and $70. So even when you take a look at the recent price action, you have to zoom out to realize oil prices are not going to go back to those pre war levels. Analysts that I've spoken to in the last few days have said you should not expect to see that anytime soon, in part not only because we aren't seeing the massive flow of tankers through the Strait of Hormuz as you were just talking about with Kir, but also because of the fact that even if those floodgates open on ships actually moving through there, there have been so much damage to those oil producing facilities in that region that it's going to take years in some cases to rebuild the capacity of oil coming out of that area. And for that reason that could lead to elevated oil costs in the medium term. So even if the cease fire holds, there is reason to think that the damage has already been done to the

Kelly O'Donnell (15:35)

global economy and the price people pay in their budgets and at the pump, that'll continue to be a pain point. Thank you Brian. We appreciate your time. And coming up, a top adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu joins us on this tenuous state of the US Iran cease fire and President Trump's demands that Israel pulled back on its attacks on Lebanon. Plus, the view from inside Beirut. We'll hear directly from a world central kitchen chef working to keep civilians fed as violence and a mounting humanitarian emergency grip that region. You're watching Meet the Press now.

Comcast Business Advertiser (16:19)

The world of business is constantly evolving and Comcast business keeps you totally in step with secure AI backed networking in more than 100 countries. They're powering over 90% of the Fortune 500 and millions of small businesses. That's a lot of muscle. And behind it all, thousands of experts answering your call at 2am like it's 2pm One partner powering how business gets done for companies around the globe. When you add it all up, no one does business like Comcast business.

Elena (16:50)

Hey weirdos. I'm Elena.

Ash (16:52)

And I'm Ash and we are the hosts of Morbid Podcast.

Elena (16:56)

Each week we dive into the dark and fascinating world of true crime, spooky history and the unexplained.

Ash (17:02)

From infamous killers and unsolved mysteries to haunted places and strange legends. We cover it all with research, empathy, humor and a few creative expletives.

Elena (17:12)

It's smart, it's spooky, and it's just the right amount of weird.

Ash (17:16)

Two new episodes drop every week and there's even a bonus once a month.

Elena (17:20)

Find us wherever you listen to podcasts.

Keir Simmons (17:22)

Yay.

Audience Member 1 (17:23)

Woo.

Audience Member 2 (17:24)

Ay.

Prolon Advertiser (17:32)

Busy work weeks can leave you feeling drained. Prolon's five day fasting mimicking diet rejuvenates you at the cellular level, lets you enjoy real food and does not require an injection. Developed at USC's Longevity Institute, Prolon supports biological age reduction, metabolism, skin health and fat loss when combined with proper exercise and nutrition. Get 15% off plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe@prolonlife.com PandoraProMo

Kelly O'Donnell (18:02)

welcome back. New comments from Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this afternoon telling Israelis there is no ceasefire with Lebanon and Israel is continuing to strike Hezbollah targets, quote with force. Now that's despite earlier today saying he was open to direct talks with Lebanon's government. Sources tell NBC News that direct negotiations between Israel and Lebanon are under discussion to take place as early as next week. Netanyahu's vow to keep striking Hezbollah seems to go against President Trump telling our colleague Peter Nicholas at a phone call today that Israel was going to say scale back its attacks in Lebanon, saying, quote, I spoke with Bibi and he's going to low key it. I just think we have to be sort of a little more low key. Those are the words of the president. Joining me now is Ophir Falk, the chief foreign policy adviser to the Israeli prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. We're so pleased to have you with us today. Thank you for making time.

Ophir Falk (19:01)

Thank you for having me, Kelly.

Kelly O'Donnell (19:03)

Thank you. Appreciate it. President Trump is trying to send a message that he believes Israel will scale back, that he has delivered that message to the prime minister. But we're also understanding that Mr. Netanyahu says there are targets related to Hezbollah in Beirut that he wants to strike. So where does it stand right now? Is there a scaling back or is there ongoing forceful attacks inside Beirut?

Ophir Falk (19:30)

Well, there was no real need to ask to scale back because the hit yesterday was a, the hardest hit that we hit Hezbollah since the pager operation where we took out hundreds of Hezbollah terrorists. We took out hundreds of Hezbollah terrorists yesterday. And clearly we're going to be hitting different places. And as the prime minister said, there is no ceasefire with Hezbollah. We have to degrade their capabilities. And if there's one thing that we've Learned from the October 7th atrocity is that we cannot have a genocidal terrorist organization on our border. We can't have Hamas on our border in the south and Gaza and we can't have Hezbollah on our border in the north in Lebanon.

Kelly O'Donnell (20:13)

So when we hear the president using the phrase we need to low key it a little bit, we need to scale back, that's not happening.

Ophir Falk (20:22)

Well, the prime minister and the president have had the greatest cooperation. They have the greatest cooperation and coordination throughout the war. At the greatest cooperation I've ever seen between a president and a prime minister and between our armed forces, between the American and Israeli armed forces. We're partners in war and we're also partners in peace.

Kelly O'Donnell (20:41)

But on this point, apparently there is a disagreement. If they see it so differently, scaling back and going forward are not the same thing.

Ophir Falk (20:50)

Actually, we are in complete agreement between the prime minister and the president.

Kelly O'Donnell (20:57)

Let me move on to a different point. The World Health Organization says the evacuation order for Beirut Includes two major hospitals, and there are no alternative medical facilities available to receive the 450 patients from those hospitals. And they're calling on Israel to reverse that order. Will Israel comply in that way?

Ophir Falk (21:19)

Well, Israel, we'll take that into consideration. Israel does everything possible to mitigate, to minimize the harm to civilians. We always do. At the same time, Hezbollah and the Iranian regime and Hamas does everything impossible, everything possible to put civilians in harm's way. They use civilians as human shields. That's what they do on all the fronts. And we do everything possible to minimize the, the harm to civilians, and we'll continue to do that. But the, but the terrorists, the Hezbollah terrorists will not have immunity. They can hide or they can run, but they can't hide. And we them, we've taken out over a thousand Hezbollah terrorists since they launched the war against us. And we'll continue to do what is needed to secure the Israeli, the Israeli citizens.

Kelly O'Donnell (22:07)

Is there a sense that having conversations, trying to get to some sort of agreement with Lebanon and to deal with Hezbollah at the negotiating table, do you believe that's actually going to happen? How realistic is that?

Ophir Falk (22:25)

Well, our goal in the negotiations with, with Lebanon is to dismantle Hezbollah and to reach a peace agreement with, with Lebanon that is the exact same. That's a mutual interest for the Lebanese people. And the Lebanese government is to forge peace with Israel and to dismantle Hezbollah, which has taken the Lebanese people hostage for years in this operation. We've been able to degrade Hezbollah's capabilities significantly, and we're going to continue to degrade their capabilities. And that is what has enabled the negotiations between the Lebanese government and Israel to continue degrading and to dismantle Hezbollah and to forge a historic peace, possibly an historic peace between Lebanon and Israel. Peace through strength.

Kelly O'Donnell (23:16)

We understand the Lebanese government has expressed a powerlessness to control Hezbollah. Do you accept that? And do you think that is an impediment to trying to get anything done through negotiations?

Ophir Falk (23:29)

Sorry, can you repeat that question? Kelly? I had a problem.

Kelly O'Donnell (23:32)

Sure. No problem. The Lebanese government has talked about its inability to stop Hezbollah, to control Hezbollah. Do you think that's a serious impediment to having any kinds of negotiations?

Ophir Falk (23:43)

Well, clearly we had. We had a ceasefire agreement in November 24th that was a clear agreement that the Lebanese government needed to dismantle Hezbollah and demilitarize southern Lebanon. That did not happen. That did not happen either it's because of a lack of will or a lack of capability, but did not happen. And that's what forced our hand now to go back into Lebanon again after we were attacked. And that's what we're doing right now. We're degrading Hezbollah and we're demilitarizing southern Lebanon, and we're not going to let this genocidal terrorist organization anywhere near our border. Now that Hezbollah has been degraded significantly, Lebanon, or maybe Lebanon government can step up to the plate and to do the right thing and to continue to degrade and to dismantle Hezbollah. And that's what we're going to be talking about. Amongst other things, that's what we're going to be talking about in the negotiations.

Kelly O'Donnell (24:40)

There'll be another set of negotiations coming up in Pakistan where the US Will be dealing with Iran. Israel is not a party to those negotiations. What does Israel want to see come out of that?

Ophir Falk (24:55)

Well, our objectives in operation, in Operation Roaring lion, were to remove the existential threat posed by the Ayatollah regime, including their nuclear capabilities, their ballistic missile capabilities, and to create the conditions for the Iranian people to do the right thing and to take their destiny into their own hands. What have we achieved so far in this war? We've degraded their nuclear capabilities significantly, including by taking out an additional key nuclear bomb scientists. We've taken out thousands of missiles. We've degraded their capability of producing additional missiles. We've taken out hundreds of launchers. In terms of the regime, we've taken out their key leadership.

Kelly O'Donnell (25:40)

Do you consider that regime change?

Ophir Falk (25:42)

Leadership,

Kelly O'Donnell (25:45)

Removing personnel? Do you think it's regime change?

Ophir Falk (25:51)

Part of it is to remove the Ayatollah regime. That is part of it. And to create the conditions, as part of creating the conditions for the Iranian people to take their destiny in their own hands. Sooner or later, this regime will fall. It will fall.

Kelly O'Donnell (26:08)

We so appreciate your time and your insights today. Thank you for opening your schedule for us today. Ophir Falk, thank you so much for your time and groups in Lebanon. Thank you, sir. Groups in Lebanon say more than a million people have been displaced in the last five weeks as violence has intensified across the country, creating a dire humanitarian situation. Families have been arriving to shelters with very little, many struggling to feed themselves. Chef Jose Andres, World Central Kitchen, has been working around the clock to help feed some of these families. I spoke last hour with the chef leading those operations, Aileen Kamakian. And I began by asking her to describe what the last few days have been like in Beirut where she has been working. Let's watch.

Aileen Kamakian (26:56)

Yesterday was, you know, everybody was waiting a ceasefire, but instead we had an unexpected. A huge bombing Everywhere, hundreds of targets in 10 minutes, they said. But it was a nightmare for us. Almost simultaneously, different neighborhood in Beirut were hit by very heavy bump. Loud explosions everywhere. Smoke rose up from all sides, blood everywhere. You know, it's a. It was like the several strikes were in busy commercial areas, dense, densely populated areas. It reminds me of the port explosion where the dust was that shocked you. The smell of the blood, the sound of the sirens. Everything is very heavy. You know, people is desperate and people are. Every place where people and injured people and all the cars were transformed to ambulance. And Ministry of Health was telling please get out of the street so that we can take the wounded people into hospitals. Hospitals are overcrowded and they are. They have materials and medicine and needles and everything that is missing because of the heavy, heavy injured people that is coming every day and every day within a month. We have more than 1.2 million people displaced before yesterday.

Kelly O'Donnell (28:25)

And the chaos that you're describing is hard to even comprehend and the unpredictability of it all. I know that Prime Minister Netanyahu has talked about wanting to have talks with Lebanon. And what do you think the leaders need to hear from someone like you who is seeing what the real human effect is and the needs are as they head into the potential for some kind of talks.

Aileen Kamakian (28:52)

You know, the need is extremely, extremely high. People are living in shelters which is not ready to be a shelter. It's a school, basically. It's a governmental school. There's no basic needs. There's no toilet, there's no shower. Women and children, children are condensed in this shelter. It's overcrowded. And anytime epidemic can rise because of the no hygiene whatsoever. We're not ready for. We don't have shelters. We don't have real protected shelters, well equipped and everything. The need is extremely high. Word. Central kitchen is cooking and distributing hot meals. And we are really. We're growing and we're cooking a lot and a lot every day, more and more. But the need to stand.

Kelly O'Donnell (29:43)

You're up to more than a million meals so far that you and the team have been able to provide, which is obviously just an enormous number and speaks to the depth of the need. And do you get a sense that there is a next step in the work that you're doing for your team is your area is expand. Is that expanding?

Aileen Kamakian (30:07)

Just while we're talking. We have a new evacuation order right now bigger than almost half of Beirut should be evacuated. I don't know where we will go. Where, where should we go? It is, it is the need is extremely high. Despite the ongoing security challenges, the word central kitchen continues to adapt operation. We relocate the kitchen. We're adapting to the situation with partnering with local chefs and volunteers with coordinating closely with the municipality and government to be able to, to, to cook and to distribute this. The million is a bit too sweet feeling, you know, like I'm very, we're very proud that we've done this figure. But from the others part, we're heartbroken because we know how many people are still in need. We need today, you know, it's not tomorrow, it's not after one month. People are hungry. The need is extremely high. And today you have almost 17% of the population is in acute food insecurity. This means like you have around 900,000 people do not have a secure access to basic food. The number is rising. Lebanon is almost import 80% of its food, especially wheat. We have vegetables and fruits, but the rest is all imported. So extremely expensive. A lot of people will not afford food.

Kelly O'Donnell (31:31)

Well, what you are describing certainly gives us a picture of the urgency and the health concerns that can result from the kind of displacement that you're talking about. Thank you for giving us a window into the crisis there, Sheffield. Thank you so much for your time and we wish you well. And still to come, an unprecedented moment today at the White House. First lady Melania Trump delivering a rare on camera statement denying that she has any ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, while also calling for Congress to hold public hearings with survivors. Keep it here on Meet the Press now.

Elena (32:16)

Hey, weirdos. I'm Alaina.

Ash (32:19)

And I'm Ash. And we are the host host of Morbid Podcast.

Elena (32:22)

Each week we dive into the dark and fascinating world of true crime, spooky history and the unexplained.

Ash (32:29)

From infamous killers and unsolved mysteries to haunted places and strange legends, we cover it all with research, empathy, humor and a few creative expletives.

Elena (32:38)

It's smart, it's spooky, and it's just the right amount of weird.

Ash (32:42)

Two new episodes drop every week and there's even a bonus once a month.

Elena (32:46)

Find us wherever you listen to podcasts.

Keir Simmons (32:49)

Yay.

Audience Member 1 (32:50)

Woo.

Kelly O'Donnell (32:50)

Ay.

Prolon Advertiser (32:59)

Busy work weeks can leave you feeling drained. Prolon's five day fasting mimicking diet rejuvenates you at the cellular level, lets you enjoy real food, and does not require an injection. Developed at USC's Longevity Institute, Prolon supports biological age reduction, metabolism, skin health and fat loss when combined with exercise and Nutrition. Get 15% off plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe at prolonlife.com PandoraProomo

Angie Hicks (33:26)

hi, I'm Angie Hicks, co founder of Angie from Roof Repair to Emergency Plumbing and more. When you use Angie for your home projects, you know all your jobs will be done well, Angie the one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find a pro for your project@angie.com

Kelly O'Donnell (33:44)

welcome back. Turning now to breaking news from the White House and it's not the type you might normally. This is very unexpected remarks today from First Lady Melania Trump where she came out to talk about Jeffrey Epstein railing against what she called lies tying her to the late convicted sex offender.

Melania Trump (34:06)

The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today. I am not Epstein's victim. Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump. I have never had any knowledge of Epstein abuse of his victims. I was never involved in any capacity. I was not a participant.

Kelly O'Donnell (34:35)

Really extraordinary comments coming from Mrs. Trump. And of course, this follows Congress's actions where they forced the release of files on the investigation into action. Epstein and Congress continues to investigate Epstein's relationship with a number of prominent figures. Now today, the first lady urging Congress to go further and to allow Epstein's survivors to publicly testify.

Melania Trump (35:00)

I call on Congress to provide the women who have been victimized by Epstein with a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors. Give these victims their opportunity to testify under oath in front of Congress with the power of sworn testimony. Each and every woman should have her day to tell her story in public if she wishes.

Kelly O'Donnell (35:32)

Joining me now from the White House is Monica Alba. Also with us is national law enforcement and intelligence correspondent Tom Winter. And Monica, we are very conditioned to expect the unexpected from the White House, but not from the East Wing, meaning the first lady's office. This is really extraordinary for her to speak about the victims, to distance herself. How much was this under wraps before Mrs. Trump actually delivered her remarks? How much of a shockwave was felt at the White House?

Monica Alba (36:01)

This was an extremely tightly held speech, Kelly. I can tell you that they made the announcement that she was going to be making some kind of of statement about a day ago. And there had been a lot of speculation about what that could be on. She had chosen a very similar venue some months back to talk about her work for trying to reunify children of Ukraine with their families after the Russian invasion. So there were questions about whether this could be something similar to that. But the fact that she came out today and addressed head on for the very first time some of these very persistent questions about what she may have known about Jeffrey Epstein, her potential relationship with him, which she really has denied here, is extremely significant for a First lady that is so cautious and so calculated about when she decides to make her moves, about what she decides to say in public, and about what she wants people to know about her. I've been covering her for years, and she is intensely private and, again, very intentional. But we do know from our reporting that over the last year or so, she has privately been very upset and very angry about what her team calls these defamatory rumors, this falsehoods, these information specifically, again, linking her to Epstein. That we know that that is something she talked about, again behind closed doors. But she had never made the leap to want to come and talk about it in public until today. And that is why what we saw today was so extraordinary, as you called it.

Kelly O'Donnell (37:28)

And what we are accustomed to hearing from the President, he has used the phrase it's a Democrat hoax, meaning the attention around it, or that it's a distraction or everyone should move on. Do you have any sense about why now for Melania Trump?

Monica Alba (37:41)

Yeah. And what's also really interesting here is that the President has tried to call it a, quote, dead issue, has really tried to put it in the rearview, especially when we do talk about the role Congress is playing. But that seems to be a part of potentially the answer to the question of why now? Because this isn't just a statement to clear the air, so to speak. This is a statement that also has a call to action. This is the first lady of the United States asking lawmakers, asking Congress to do something that they haven't done yet, which is to have these survivors come together in an open hearing to provide that testimony under oath and to have their stories heard, she says, because in her words, then, only then will the truth be known. So it seems like there is sort of a collision here, potentially, Kelly, of where Congress has been heading, trying to seek more information on this and with the first lady or the potential for some additional story or reporting that might be coming, additional information that could always come out, that certainly did come out when we did see the release of those additional emails. And that's another fact of this, Kelly, the fact that there was some email correspondence between Melania Trump and between Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's co conspirator, many, many years ago. She wanted to come out, she says, and talk about this as, quote, casual correspondence, and said that it was really nothing beyond that. But that was new information that we got from the first lady in terms of those private communications. Many Many years ago that had only come out as a result of that push in Congress for additional information.

Kelly O'Donnell (39:12)

Let me bring Tom into our conversation now and for our viewers to understand. Tom has been working the Epstein case for years, has read extensively the voluminous files, the most recent ones, but also the court documents and so forth earlier. So he's got a lot of background on this. Can you give us a sense of what Melania was referring to, Melania Trump was referring to when she was touting these lies that she wanted to distance herself from? What's that about?

Tom Winter (39:40)

Yeah, I think the biggest one that she wants to, she probably wanted to address, and we heard from her there, that she specifically addresses the idea that Jeffrey Epstein, Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump and that's how their relationship began. This comes up in what's called an FBI 302, and we're going to show it for you in the course of an interview. There's a section there, you can read it in the second paragraph, just below that heavily redacted section that says Epstein introduced Melania Trump to Donald Trump and FBI 302. The 302 just is the name of the document are the notes from the agents conducting an interview. We don't know specifically who they're speaking to here. It's a former assistant of Jeffrey Epstein's that they're talking to. We don't know that person's name. And they're just notes of an interview. So we don't know in what context that information is offered. We don't know if it was offered for the truth or it was just, hey, here's something I heard. It was a rumor. It was a discussion. These statements that are included within the FBI 302, they are never offered in a court proceeding. They are not offered for the truth, as they say in court. It is not admissible. They're basically just the notes of the FBI agent. They happen to be typed up because that's the way we all do things now. We memorialize them in some sort of an electronic form. But typically they come off of the handwritten documents that FBI agents take when they're talking to somebody. And they very rarely record their interviews. So this could just have been somebody offering this as a rumor that they heard this at some point. Some people have said, look, she's speaking to an FBI agent, this assistant. If in fact she lied to them, she could be charged. Well, that is true. But because that statement does have any sort of context around it, we don't know, Kelly, whether or not this is a rumor that they heard or something that they heard based more on fact. There is no other corroborating information that we've ever heard that ties Melania to Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump as far as getting their relationship started from anybody that's known them at any point.

Kelly O'Donnell (41:33)

And so when people think about the 3 million-plus documents that have been released as a result of Congress passing a law that the president signed, any mention of Melania Trump in any of those documents?

Tom Winter (41:45)

Yes, for sure. So besides the reference that we just were chatting about, the other references, there's a number of communications that occur. We could show one of them for you. Now, It's a very simple email. It comes from Melania Trump to Ghislaine Maxwell. You're looking at their Dear G, how are you? Nice story about JE In New York. Mad presumably Jeffrey Epstein. You look great on the picture. I know you're busy. Call me when you come back to New York. I think that speaks very specifically to some of the things that Melania Trump addressed, the first lady addressed from the White House today in that extraordinary speech that Monica was there for, the idea that, look, I know these people. They were part of the circuit to her point. She has always steadfastly said that she did not know of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes at the time. And obviously, as somebody who's speaking out now and saying that the victim should be heard just as kind of adjacent to that, in the course of our reporting, nobody has suggested to us that there was any sort of awareness by Melania of Jeffrey Epstein's crime. And I believe if we can go back to that document, something just caught my eye. If we have the opportunity to bring it up, which is the date of when it was sent. This was sent in 2002. Exactly. And that's prior to the criminal case even beginning against Jeffrey Epstein, not prior to the abuse that eventually he was charged with here in New York, but it was prior to any sort of investigation becoming public when she sent that note.

Kelly O'Donnell (43:10)

Tom and Monica, thank you for giving us insights into a story that I know is going to drive a lot of curiosity and a lot more reporting. Thank you both. And up next, the president of Cuba meets the press. Kristen Welker. The reason she's not here in this seat today is she was sitting down with the leader of the island nation in his first ever American TV interview as President Trump threatens to take over Cuba. We'll bring that to you. Stay with us right here on MEET THE PRESS now. Welcome back. Turning now to a MEET the press exclusive from Havana. As tensions between the US And Cuba are running extremely high, the island nation is facing rolling blackouts and fuel shortages, triggered in large part by an energy blockade imposed by the US and with President Trump taking military action in both Venezuela and Iran, he's also warned that Cuba could be next. Last month, the president suggested that he could, quote, take Cuba if he wanted.

Donald Trump (44:16)

You know, all my life I've been hearing about the United States and Cuba. When will the United States do it? I do believe I'll be the honor of having the honor of taking care of Cuba. That's a big honor.

Keir Simmons (44:31)

Taking Cuba.

Donald Trump (44:32)

Taking Cuba in some form. Yeah, taking Cuba. I mean, whether I free it, take it. I think I could do anything I want with it. You want to know the truth? They're a very weakened nation.

Kelly O'Donnell (44:46)

Our own Kristen Welker is in Cuba where she just spoke exclusively with Cuba's president about the future of his country and whether he will remain its leader.

Kristen Welker (44:58)

Kelly, in his first television interview ever, Cuban President Diaz Canal said he thinks it is possible for the United States and Cuba to reach an agreement if the conditions are right. And he was defiant when I pressed him. Would he step down in order to save his country? Would you be willing to step down if it meant saving Cuba? Esta de sueso adimitier contal.

Cuban President Diaz-Canel (45:31)

Important journalists. Have you ever asked that question to any other president in the world?

Kristen Welker (45:38)

Because it's one of the conditions the United States is asking for. Would you ever consider that?

Cuban President Diaz-Canel (45:44)

Let me explain. Have you asked that question to any other president?

Kelly O'Donnell (45:47)

I asked very.

Cuban President Diaz-Canel (45:48)

To any other ask that question to the world, could you ask that question

Kelly O'Donnell (45:52)

to very hard questions of President Trump?

Cuban President Diaz-Canel (45:59)

Is that a question from you or is that coming from the State Department

Kristen Welker (46:02)

of the U.S. my question is because it's one of the things that we've heard the US Government talk about, that they want political change here in Cuba. So my question for you, if they asked you, if they said they this is one condition, would you say because

Cuban President Diaz-Canel (46:17)

of your honesty, I want to assume that you're asking that question because of those reasons. In Cuba, the people who are in leadership position is not elected by the US Government and they don't have a mandate from the US Government. We have a free sovereign state, a free state. We have self determination and independence, and we are not subjected to the designs of the United States. On the other hand, Cuban leaders are not here representing an elite of power. You can see my background, where I was born, my family, what I've done throughout my life. We are elected by the people, although there's a narrative trying to disregard that, any one of us, before we become part of a leadership role, we need to be elected at the grassroots level in our electoral district by thousands of Cubans. And then those who represent the Cubans at the national center of the People of Power elect those leadership positions and those offices like it happens in many other countries around the world. So we have an election system on the basis of people's participation. So whenever we take this responsibility position, and this leadership position is not out of our personal ambition or a corporate ambition or even a party ambition, we do that as a mandate by the people. And the concept of revolutionaries giving up has stepping down is not part of our vocabulary. If the Cuban people understand that I am not fit for office, that I am not at the I have not risen to the occasion, then, and I should not be holding this position of president, I will respond to them. But you need to realize that you should not focus only on the president of the country because we have a collegiate leadership which is very closely linked to the people. But it's not the United States that can impose anything on us. The US Government that has implemented that hostile policy against Cuba has no moral to demand anything from Cuba. They have no moral, not even to say that they are concerned about the situation of the Cuban people and that the Cuban government has taken Cuba to this situation. When they have all this responsibility on their shoulders. I think the most important thing would be for them to understand and take this critical position, a sincere position, and that they recognize how much it has cost the Cuban people, the policy that they have implemented in terms of what they've done and how much they have deprived the American people from a normal relationship with the Cuban people. And that they set out as we have requested and as we have asked and as we're interested in, to engage in dialogue and discuss any topic without any condition. Not demanding changes from our political system, as we are not demanding changes from the American system, about which we have a number of doubts and a number

Audience Member 2 (49:27)

of

Cuban President Diaz-Canel (49:29)

considerations, and that we can focus on what brings us together and what can create spaces of understanding in order to move away from confrontation and having a path forward for both countries of benefit, of friendship and solidarity. Solidarity.

Kristen Welker (49:45)

It is worth noting President Diaz Canal would not commit to any of the demands that the United States is asking for, raising real questions about whether both sides will be able to reach an agreement.

Kelly O'Donnell (49:58)

Kelly. Thank you so much, Kristen. She also pressed the president of Cuba on human rights issues. Freedom of the Press and so much more. You can see an extended version of Kristen's exclusive interview interview this Sunday on Meet the Press and tonight on NBC Nightly News and on your local NBC station. Now let's turn to some domestic politics. We'll try and squeeze this in on a busy, busy day. Democrats are looking to flip the House and the Senate in November's midterms. We know that the party will first have to overcome a significant image problem, including from within its own base. In the latest edition of our focus group series produced by Syracuse University and the research firms Engages and sego, we spoke to Democratic voters in Maine and Michigan, two states with key Senate races this November. Here's how those Democratic voters described their own party.

Audience Member 2 (50:50)

What are the key characteristics or traits that best describe today's Democratic Party?

Audience Member 3 (50:58)

Subdued Paul Disjointed.

Audience Member 2 (51:03)

Cindy.

Kelly O'Donnell (51:06)

Lacking.

Audience Member 2 (51:08)

Lucy.

Kelly O'Donnell (51:09)

Spineless.

Ophir Falk (51:10)

I think the word that best describes it them right now is bruised.

Audience Member 4 (51:15)

Weak.

Kelly O'Donnell (51:17)

Diana Floundering. Edward Weak but well intentioned.

Angie Hicks (51:23)

Jennifer Effective and easily distracted.

Audience Member 2 (51:30)

John.

Audience Member 4 (51:32)

Finalists, what do you stand for? Don't define yourself by what you're against or who you're not. What is your platform? What are you going to do? What are the specifics? No platitudes. Get to the brass tacks and get a good ground game.

Kelly O'Donnell (51:51)

Despite that negativity, all the voters we spoke to want to see their party, the Democratic Party, win in November and they all agree that that electability is what matters most. Listen to this.

Audience Member 2 (52:04)

What's more important to you when it comes to voting in the Democratic primary? Picking the candidate that takes the fight to Trump or picking the one who has the best shot at beating the Republican opponent in November? So show of fingers. Who says a candidate that will take the fight to Trump? None of you. So all of you say it's the candidate who has the best shot of being the Republican opponent in that race. All seven of you. How do you say it's the candidate who has the best shot of beating the Republican opponent? All six.

Ophir Falk (52:47)

Okay.

Kelly O'Donnell (52:48)

The most important thing to me is getting the seat.

White House Official 2 (52:51)

And if Platner has a better chance

Kelly O'Donnell (52:52)

of getting the seat.

White House Official 2 (52:54)

I like Mills, but Platner has a better chance of getting the seat.

Kelly O'Donnell (52:57)

It's about getting the seat.

Audience Member 2 (52:58)

What gives you confidence that Stevens could beat Mike Rogers?

Audience Member 3 (53:02)

Because the polls that I've been watching, she came out early and it seems like at least in the polls she's got the best chance of beating him. And again, that's one of, that is one of my primary factors in who I'm going to vote for and someone

Keir Simmons (53:16)

that can actually win.

Kelly O'Donnell (53:19)

Joining me now is Margaret Taleb, director of Syracuse University's Democracy, Journalism and Citizenship Institute. Margaret is always great to hear from voters and to know what's on their minds. That's a dose of negativity to the Democratic Party.

Audience Member 1 (53:34)

Oh, yeah. I mean, these are obviously Maine and Michigan voters are very different. They have different concerns and traits and patterns and things on their mind. But they're all down on their own party and they don't care because they're so down on President Trump's policies with regard to everything, the war in Iran, the price of gas, the execution of of ice unleashing on American citizens that they're like eyes on the prize. Doesn't matter that we don't like our own party. Doesn't matter that our candidates are complicated and trouble. In some cases, we don't even care if they take the fight to Trump. They want to win in November. It is a tactical, strategic choice. And really, these two totally different groups within the Democratic base, whether they're progressives or moderates, whether they're in the Midwest in a Rust Belt state or whether they're like on the coast.

Kelly O'Donnell (54:20)

I understand there were more progressives in just the mix here. Do you think that affects the tone we heard?

Audience Member 1 (54:26)

Well, actually, we heard some clips for there for moderates, and they were saying the same things again in Maine in particular, which is a very interesting race because of the dynamics of that Platner primary with Governor Mills. There are progressives are more enthusiastic about Platner than moderates, but doesn't matter. Even the moderates who aren't enthusiastic think he's the guy, he's the best poised. That's what they're going with. Even when they have reservations. Elections, which many of them do, and

Kelly O'Donnell (54:51)

sometimes in primaries, electability doesn't necessarily produce the best candidate who can ultimately win. We've seen that time and time again. There also seem to be generational issues here. How do you see that playing out?

Audience Member 1 (55:02)

I think it depends on how you define electability. And what we were hearing in these conversations are themes like youth, like someone who's in their 40s instead of almost 80, was a theme that resonated with some of these voters. And. But I don't know how do you define authenticity? But I think in this case, it's the idea that it doesn't matter what you're supposed to say or do. Just go be yourself, because that's what Trump does and it's worked for him. It's not to hear them. It's not so much about taking the fight to Trump as it is about playing the game in a way that can be effective. And of course, Trump's not on the ballot in November. But these voters talking strategically about the idea that the only way to blunt the president's policies is to blunt his party's ability to control the chambers of Congress. And so that's really what they were talking about.

Kelly O'Donnell (55:52)

And do you get a sense these voters sense their sort of outsized power? When you look at the map, everyone gets one vote. It's counted the same. But because of where they live, their ultimate choices could shift that party control.

Audience Member 1 (56:06)

Yeah. It's funny. Most voters, especially the, you know,

Kelly O'Donnell (56:10)

sort

Audience Member 1 (56:11)

of everyday voters, are not thinking about who's going to flip the Senate. Can we be the ones who flip the Senate? The Senate is never the races everyone's talking about. They're talking about the Senate.

Kelly O'Donnell (56:20)

That tells us something, doesn't it? And when it comes to quality candidates versus electability, are you seeing or hearing anything there that do you think voters are picking it in a way that ultimately gives us kind of the quality candidates that tend to do better?

Audience Member 1 (56:35)

You heard some of these nuances in both races in Michigan, people saying they liked a candidate because they thought they were very qualified. But then at the same time, winning is the most important thing. So I think these voters are trying to sort it out in real time, juggle foreign policy, economics, kitchen table and Trump all in one.

Kelly O'Donnell (56:51)

So much more to talk about. Glad to see you and appreciate you bringing these conversations to us. Margaret, thank you so much. And we're back tomorrow with more of Meet the Press now. And of course, there's more news news straight ahead right here on NBC News Now.

Zepbound Advertiser (57:05)

Snoring, gasping during sleep. Feeling fatigued. Wake up to zepbound Tirzepatide, the first and only FDA approved prescription medicine for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea and adults with obesity. Zepbound is an injectable prescription medicine that may help adults with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea and obesity to improve their osa. Zeb. Zeb Bound should be used with a reduced calorie diet and increased physical activity. Zeb Bound is Approved as a 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5 or 15mg injection. Zetbound contains Tirzepatide and should not be used with other Tirzepatide containing products or any GLP1 receptor agonist medicines. It is not known if Zepbound is safe and effective for use in children. Do not share needles or pins or reuse needles. Don't take zetbound if allergic to it or if you or someone in your family had medullary thyroid, thyroid cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. Tell your doctor if you get a lump or swelling in your neck. Stop zepbound and call your doctor if you have severe stomach pain or a serious allergic reaction. Severe side effects may include inflamed pancreas or gallbladder problems. Tell your doctor if you experience vision changes, depression or suicidal thoughts before scheduled procedures with anesthesia. If you're nursing pregnant, plan to be or taking birth control pills. Taking zepbound with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. Some side effects include nausea, diarrhea and vomiting, which can cause dehydration and worsen kidney problems. Talk to your doctor, call 1-800-545-979 or visit zepbound lily. Com Zepbound and its delivery device base and Quickpin are registered trademarks owned or licensed by Eli Lilly and company. Its subsidiaries or affiliates.